Grammar or state?

[SilverSpringss]

DD passed her 11+ and was awarded a place at a grammar school. She was keen to take the test and was excited to be given a place, so we accepted.

Now reality has kicked in and she is having a massive meltdown about going. She has had the same group of friends (there are 5 of them) since nursery, and only one of them also has a place at the grammar. The others are of course trying to persuade her not to go and are saying how much they will miss her.

DD is not the most confident of children, she definitely isn't the queen bee of the group and likes to follow the others. However they are a lovely group of girls and never have any fall outs or arguments. She is now really upset about having to leave them, and insists she wants to attend the state school with the others.

Just after some advice on what you would do in my situation? I don't want her to be miserable at school and resent me for having such an awful time.

"the facilities and opportunities offered at grammar vs comp are like night and day"

The facilities of state schools won't be different like night and day - grammar school are given less budget allocation per head.

My DC's grammar has the feel of a private school. State funding is very low but successful old boys' and girls' contributions make all the difference.

Extra funding from alumni or parents contributions is not unique for grammar school only, those numbers are published by schools account. It will help but I suspect how much difference it will make in terms making up the difference (about 500-1k per year per head difference between grammar and state schools) let alone match the financial funding difference between state and private schools.

I don't think a good chat will make a difference tbh. This is so normal. Even if she was going to the comp, she'd be nervous. Just keep her busy, lots of hugs love and patience. Once she starts it'll be easier.

Grammar is state school

are you mixing up with selective independent school?

Oh hi @PreplexJ. You do love to bulldoze into these threads, wilfully misinterpret what people say and tell them they’re wrong.

I visited five secondary schools, a mix of grammars and comps, and the difference absolutely WAS like night and day. I can only speak for my part of the U.K., maybe other areas are different but I doubt it.

It doesn’t matter that comps receive more government money per child 🤷‍♀️ The grammar schools had nicer buildings (even if old and slightly shabby around the edges, still more pleasant environments than the comps), nicer kids, better trips, better extracurricular activities, better everything. The difference, of course, is the attitudes of the children and the families which is priceless.

I highly highly doubt the old boys and girls contributions are why your DCs grammar feels like a private school. Those contributions will be small and probably just enough to match the funding a comp gets. Its far more likely they are an academy/voluntary aided and have been investing money they have already.

Our SS N London state grammar is falling apart. Completely overwhelmed with applications though. DDs comp has facilities better than many London privates. A purpose built eco building. In essence, school choice is a myth and it's all random. Money obviously helps but even then, much depends on your kids underlying ability and the year group/tutor group they fall into. Even the 'side' of the year group your child ends up in can make their experience so different.

"I can only speak for my part of the U.K., maybe other areas are different but I doubt it.

It doesn’t matter that comps receive more government money per child 🤷‍♀️ The grammar schools had nicer buildings (even if old and slightly shabby around the edges, still more pleasant environments than the comps), nicer kids, better trips, better extracurricular activities, better everything. The difference, of course, is the attitudes of the children and the families which is priceless. "

I can only speak the comprehensive schools and grammar schools I have visited, all are based in London. The grammar schools have older and worse buildings, schools trips and extracurriculars are similar, definitely not better at everythings.

Not really related to OPs context but definitely related to the thread title

The Nobel Prize winner Joshua Angrist, one of his main contribution is his study on the peer effects of the highly academic state selective school in US (similar to selective grammar schools in UK). He call this as the elite illusion.
THE ELITE ILLUSION

EF: You've looked at the question of how much peers matter. Many parents obviously seek schools where they believe their children will have higher-quality peers, whatever they may mean by that term. You and your co-authors have looked at Boston and New York City selective public schools, and you concluded that peer effects don't seem to matter much. Why is that

Angrist: I'm always beating that drum. I think people are easily fooled by peer effects. Parag, Atila Abdulkadiroglu, and I call it "the elite illusion." We made that the title of a paper. I think it's a pervasive phenomenon. You look at the Boston Latin School, or if you live in Northern Virginia, there's Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology. And in New York, you have Brooklyn Tech and Bronx Science and Stuyvesan

And so people say, "Look at those awesome children, look how well they did." Well, they wouldn't get into the selective school if they weren't awesome, but that's distinct from the question of whether there's a causal effect. When you actually drill down and do a credible comparison of students who are just above and just below the cutoff, you find out that elite performance is indeed illusory, an artifact of selection. The kids who go to those schools do well because they were already doing well when they got in, but there's no effect from exposure to higher-achieving peer

We also have papers where we show that the elite illusion is not just a phenomenon relevant for marginal kids. This is in response to an objection that goes, "If you're the last kid admitted to Stuyvesant, it's not good for you because you're not strong enough." We can refute that with some of our research desig ns.s.t.?

https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/econ_focus/2020/q1/interview

I suspect you highly doubt as it doesn't suit your narrative but it is true in this case. Many of the school's ex-pupils go on to achieve significantly and they do make very significant contributions. Current parents chip in quite a lot too but I appreciate that it is a wealthy area and I know not all grammars are like that. The contributions also go beyond the financial. Old boys and girls who have gone on to be top lawyers, doctors, investment bankers, management consultants etc. provide work experience opportunities and help students make career decisions.

What narrative? You're posting about this like it's the norm in grammar schools. It's not. It may be the norm in your child's particular grammar but that's very very rare. If this is the level of support the school receives then that's FAR more than some big name independents receive.

@Foxesandsquirrels why would you say I am posting like this is the norm in grammar schools when I explicitly said “I appreciate that it is a wealthy area and not all grammars are like that.” And yes I is appreciate that we are very lucky with the level of career support too although I would say it is broadly similar to that given in independent top selectives.

From my one post you said 'it doesn't fit my narrative'. Why would you say that? What narrative? It makes no sense. I was literally saying that it's unlikely the money they get from old boys/girls is that significant and that's still the truth. I never said your kids school doesn't have good facilities? They may provide all that you say, but unless you work in their finance team you won't know it for sure. I don't understand your problem with my comments anyway. I've worked in schools for many years and your kids grammar school is very very rare, even for a wealthy area.

"your kids grammar school is very very rare, even for a wealthy area"

Agree that a coed grammar school is rare, in addition a school in a wealthy area with regular sizable contribution is also rare.

A grammar school that make its parents feel like it is equivalent to a private school is definitely not rare though.

Subjectively one would rather look at the actual accounts for income and expenditure than just feelings.

If both are state schools, then she doesn't have a place at the other school, and there's no guarantee you'd get one for September now. So, starting from that point, she needs to go to the school she's chosen.

I think people have offered you good advice about this, but it may help you (and her?) to know that changing her mind at this stage isn't really a possibility anyway.

@PreplexJ forget equivalent. IMO DC's school is better for them than most private schools would be. Feelings are abstract. Leavers' destinations tend to be more concrete.

@Foxesandsquirrels your narrative (in your own words) that school choice is a myth and it's all random. Of course it isn't.

@Inglenookphile "Feelings are abstract. Leavers' destinations tend to be more concrete."

Leavers destinations is more concrete to do with intake selection in the first place (back by creditable science research) , less to do with the school.

The point I am making is more that if leavers' destinations of the specific grammar are in line with those of the well known independent and intake selection is similar, then value-added is broadly equivalent. So, in this specific case, it is concrete and comparable.

This is the exact illusion. Leaver destination (or public exam outcome) is not the value added measure of these selective schools - private or state comprehensive or grammar.

The education experience is not easy to do direct comparison.

I didn't say it's all random. School choice is a myth. If you think otherwise than you're coming from a very very privileged position.

I disagree completely. However that's not really the point you were making before. We were talking about facilities and funding.

Last post on this as it is derailing the thread. @PreplexJ it is absolutely not an illusion. It is FACT and comparable in this situation. Leaver destination is a concrete measure of value added when looking at similarly selecting schools. Conversely, and in line with your previous assertion, education experience is a "feeling" and therefore "abstract".

@Inglenookphile

When selecting criteria is the dominate factor of the leaver destination, the concrete measure merely suggest these schools were having similar ability intake criteria in the first place, NOT the value added as your presume it is. It is important to get the causal effect correct.

You are the one who raised about funding and facilities, which can be subjectly measured by looking at actual income and expenditure per schools.

No one deny experience on school can be different per individual parents and child.

I was this girl 18 years ago - really wasn’t sure about going, meant a long journey each way, single sex, very much knowing I would be the poor kid in a rich school (state grammar but majority fed into by private school kids). The deal my parents made with me was to try it for a year - then it would be totally my choice to move back to the Comp with my friends, no pressure or disappointment from them. Went for the year, decided to stay but was very reassuring knowing I could go back. Maybe this would be an option to give her to ease the initial fear? It doesn’t have to be a permanent thing

Of course you disagree. Am I not allowed to make more than one point?